DBMS > Graph Engine vs. IBM Cloudant vs. JaguarDB vs. mSQL vs. OpenQM

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. IBM Cloudant vs. JaguarDB vs. mSQL vs. OpenQM

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

Database as a Service offering based on Apache CouchDB

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Document store

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Multivalue DBMS

DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems
Trend Chart

Score	0.56
Rank	#241	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	2.85
Rank	#95	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#61	Key-value stores
	#16	Vector DBMS

Score	1.26
Rank	#163	Overall
	#74	Relational DBMS

Score	0.28
Rank	#291	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Website

www.graphengine.io

www.ibm.com/products/cloudant

www.jaguardb.com

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

cloud.ibm.com/docs/Cloudant

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

Developer

Microsoft

IBM, Apache Software Foundation

IBM acquired Cloudant in February 2014

DataJaguar, Inc.

Hughes Technologies

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Initial release

2010

2015

1994

1993

Current release

3.3 July 2023

4.4, October 2021

3.4-12

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

Open Source

GPL V3.0

commercial

free licenses can be provided

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

.NET and C

Erlang

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Server operating systems

.NET

hosted

Linux

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

with some exceptions

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

XML support

Some form of processing data in XML format, e.g. support for XML data structures, and/or support for XPath, XQuery or XSLT.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C#
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

View functions (Map-Reduce) in JavaScript

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

none

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

none

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data

atomic operations within a document possible

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Optimistic locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users can be defined per database

rights management via user accounts

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

More information provided by the system vendor

We invite representatives of system vendors to contact us for updating and extending the system information,
and for displaying vendor-provided information such as key customers, competitive advantages and market metrics.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

Recent citations in the news

Trinity
30 October 2010, Microsoft

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

The graph analytics landscape 2019
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

Cloudant Best (and Worst) Practices — Part 1
18 March 2019, IBM

Intro to Enterprise Cloud Storage: How to Set Up a Cloudant Database
1 December 2014, Linux.com

IBM to Purchase Cloudant Database as a service (DBaaS) Provider
22 March 2014, App Developer Magazine

IBM Code Engine and IBM Cloudant: Serverless Data and Infrastructure
16 August 2021, IBM

DataStax acquires Aurelius, the startup behind the Titan graph database
3 February 2015, VentureBeat

provided by Google News

A Brief History of PHP - Programming PHP, 3rd Edition [Book]
22 September 2018, O'Reilly Media

provided by Google News

Share this page